Interaction tree algorithms to extract effective architecture and layered performance models from traces

Journal of Systems and Software

Volumn 80, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 474-492

  Israr, Tauseef ^a   Woodside, Murray ^b   Franks, Greg ^b  

^a IBM CANADA LTD   (Canada)

^b CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Performance modelling; Performance tracing; Reverse engineering; Software architecture; Software performance

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PATTERN MATCHING; REVERSE ENGINEERING; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; TREES (MATHEMATICS);

BLOCKING SYNCHRONOUS; INTERNAL PARALLELISM; PERFORMANCE TRACING; TRACE FORMATS;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 33847312642     PISSN: 01641212     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.019     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Balsamo S., DiMarco A., Inverardi P., and Simeoni M. Model-based performance prediction in software development. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 30 5 (2004) 295-310
2. Cortellessa, V., Mirandola, R., 2000. Deriving a queueing network based performance model from UML diagrams. In: Proc. Second Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP2000), September, 2000, ACM Press, pp. 58-70.
3. El-Sayed, H., Cameron, D., Woodside, M., 1998. Automated performance modeling from scenarios and SDL designs of telecom systems. In: Proc. Int. Symp. Software Engineering for Parallel and Distributed Systems (PDSE98), Kyoto.
4. Franks, G., Majumdar, S., Neilson, J., Petriu, D.C., Rolia, J., Woodside, M., 1996. Performance analysis of distributed server systems. In: Proc. Sixth International Conference on Software Quality (6ICSQ), 1996, 15-26.
5. Franks G., and Woodside M. Effectiveness of early replies in client-server systems. Performance Evaluation (1999) 165-183
6. Hrischuk, C., Rolia, J., Woodside, M., 1995. Automated generation of software performance model using an object-oriented prototype. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (MASCOTS '95), pp. 399-409.
7. Hrischuk C., Woodside M., Rolia J., and Iversen R. Trace-based load characterization for generating software performance models. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 25 1 (1999) 122-135
8. IBM, 2002. IBM Rational PurifyPlus, Purify, PureCoverage, and Quantify: Getting Started IBM G126-5339-00.
9. Israr, T.A., 2001. Lightweight Technique for Extracting Software Architecture and Performance Models from Traces, Master's Thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa.
10. Israr, T.A., Lau, D.H., Franks, G., Woodside, M., 2005. Automatic generation of layered queueing software performance models from commonly available traces. In: Proc. 4th Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP05), Palma de Mallorca, ACM Press, pp. 147-158.
11. Jerding, D., Stasko, J., Ball, T., 1997. Visualizing interactions in program executions. In: Proc Int. Conf. Software Engineering (ICSE '97), pp. 360-370.
12. Klar R., Quick A., and Soetz F. Tools for a model-driven instrumentation for monitoring. Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Modeling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation (TOOLS91) (1992), Elsevier 165-180
13. Liu J. Real Time Systems (2000), Prentice-Hall
14. Marburger, A., Herzberg, D., 2001. E-CARES research project: utilizing dynamic information. In: Proc. 3rd Workshop on Software Reengineering, Landau.
15. Menasce D., and Gomaa H. A method for design and performance modeling of client/server systems. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 26 11 (2000) 1066-1085
16. OMG, 2005. UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time Specification, Version 1.1, OMG Specification formal/05-01-02, Object Management Group.
17. Open Group, 1998. Systems management: application response measurement (ARM) API, Technical Standard, The Open Group.
18. Petriu D.B., and Woodside M. Software performance models from system scenarios in use case maps. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Modeling Tools and Techniques (TOOLS 2002) (2002) 141-158
19. Petriu D.B., and Woodside M. A metamodel for generating performance models from UML designs. Proc. UML 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science v. 3273 (2004), Springer, Lisbon 41-53
20. Petriu D.C., and Wang X. From UML description of high-level software architecture to LQN performance models. Applications of graph transformations with industrial relevance (AGTIVE'99). Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 1779 (2000), Springer 47-62
21. Reed D.A., Aydt R.A., Noe R.J., Roth P.C., Shields K.A., Schwartz B., and Tavera L.F. Scalable performance analysis: the Pablo performance analysis environment. Proc. Conf. Scalable Parallel Libraries (1993), IEEE Computer Society Press 104-113 October, 1993
22. Rolia J., and Sevcik K. The method of layers. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 21 8 (1995) 689-700
23. Schwanke, R.W., 1991. An intelligent tool for re-engineering software modularity. In: Proc. Int Conf. Software Eng. (ICSE '91), pp. 83-92.
24. Shende S.S., and Malony A.D. The tau parallel performance system. Int. J. High Perform. Comput. Appl. 20 2 (2006) 287-311
25. Smith C.U., and Williams L.G. Performance Solutions (2002), Addison-Wesley
26. TPC, 2002. TPC Benchmark W (Web Commerce), Version 1.8, Transaction Processing Performance Council, San Jose, CA, 19 February, 2002.
27. Walker R., Murphy G., Steinbok J., and Robillard M. Efficient mapping of software system traces to architectural views. Proc. CASCON 2000 (2000) 31-40
28. Woodside M. Throughput calculation for basic stochastic rendezvous networks. Performance Evaluation 9 2 (1986) 143-160
29. Woodside M., Neilson J.E., Petriu D.C., and Majumdar S. The stochastic rendezvous network model for performance of synchronous client-server-like distributed software. IEEE Trans. Comput. 44 1 (1995) 20-34
30. Woodside M., Hrischuk C., Selic B., and Bayarov S. Automated performance modeling of software generated by a design environment. Performance Evaluation 45 (2001) 107-124